Many within the S&F Party would hold moderate views. However it's not uncommon for this kind of party to be infiltrated by those of the extreme right, as they see the party as a means to an end to push their political agenda. Today the demand might only be the right to do doughnuts on the beach in their dune buggies or shoot donkeys in the desert, tomorrow who knows!

C'mon Paul, you can do better than that.

You could try telling us of all the good legislation that the Greens have got up in the NSW Parliament.
You could tell us that the Greens leaping upon every disanter to further their political ends is not gross unfeeling opportunism with no regard to the feelings of victims.
Just look how Bob Brown leaped onto the bandwagon over the Queensland floods; peoples' homes were still flooding and he was trumpeting away.
Didn't see him up there doing a bit of relief work, or using his medical skills where they might have been of some help.

Then there was his headline grabbing attempts over the disaster in Japan. People were missing, people were trapped in the wreckage and Dr. Brown, who does love his fellow man, was attempting to make political capital out of their suffering.

Have you ever heard a Shooters' and Fishers' Party MP, or Pauline Hanson stoop so low?

However all is not lost and I'm sure you'll enjoy the show after July when Lee Rhiannon takes her place in the Senate and goes after the Leadership and Bob Brown. Bob can expect a few knives in the back and not only from Rhiannon.

Is Mise,

I've got to Thank You. If it wasn't for your threads and your consistent attacks on the Greens I would never have done any research on them. You see, I've never voted for the Greens - but since you aroused my interest - and since doing the research - I'm discovering
that perhaps they are indeed worthy of support - certainly more so
that Pauline Hanson who can barely answer the simplest question, her ideas barely resonate and she's been relegated to Woman's Day fodder.
She could open up a fish and chip shop in Sydney and I doubt anyone would care. As for the Libs, well - all I need say is two words -
"Tony Abbott" - which says it all! So again - you keep up your anti-Greens ranting - you're actually doing them a favour!

Reading the SFP Natural Resource plan was enough for me. Any party that uses terms like "continue to expand the agriculture, forestry and mining industries" at the same time as using terms like "sustainable utilisation of all natural resources" should be subject to suspicion. These are motherhood statements but what they really say is environment last, business interests first with no understanding of ecological significance.

Charlton Heston and the Tea Party indeed would be proud.

From the SFP website:
"The Shooters and Fishers Party will continue to work to expand the agriculture, forestry and mining industries in NSW. The Shooters and Fishers Party strongly supports appropriate and sustainable utilisation of all Natural Resources. The intelligent way to do this is not by 'locking them away' and restricting their use but to actively manage natural resources to achieve a balance of economic, social and environmental benefits for all people of NSW."

Then a glimmer of hope:

"Notwithstanding the above, mining exploration and extraction must never be allowed to permanently effect prime agricultural land or water systems - either surface or subterranean."

Good luck with that. While your busy approving every mining application with little attention to safety and environmental impact, not sure how you are going to ensure long term safety of water systems.

That is what is happening now. You are arguing for more of the same.

Why not put these things to a people's vote then it really would be a democratic decision not one influenced by strong lobby groups on either side.

"Why not put these things to a people's vote then it really would be a democratic decision not one influenced by strong lobby groups on either side"
Excellent idea,Pelican, I'm all for Participatory Democracy.

Lexi,

Glad to have been of help. Perhaps with your new insight you might care to give an opinion on this further post by Samuel over on the Ethics Forum;

". . . the Greens oppose the burning of wood which is a renewable resource, and one which grows reasonably fast if copicing is practiced. Gum trees contain combustible oils and the green wood can be burned in an efficient fireplace, the 'wood tar' that is a product of incomlete combustion can be collected in coolers and later recycled into the fire where it produces intense heat and by so doing is an aid to cleaner combustion.
The burning of wood is being curtailed in country areas by the various laws against harvesting fallen timber, which therefore lies on the ground and is burned in the next inevitable bush fire. Saving in pollutant gases zero.
Meanwhile the former wood burners switch to electricity, thereby putting up their cost of living, further destroying their independence and causing more polution by a greater demand for electricity.

Which demand is greater than just the heating, for the electric stove is now used to do that cooking which was formerly done on the wood heater, and a not insignificant contribution by the wood heater to keeping costs down was that many of them heated water as a virtually free by-product of combustion.
The slow-combustion wood cooking stove is also being discouraged by high wood prices so most new homes in the country have electric kitchen stoves which again sends up the cost of living particularly in winter. The wood stove used to keep the kitchen warm but now to remain comfortable the housewife must turn on the electric heater.[and up goes the bill and the pollution]

So, I'll say again: Just another example of ideology thiumphant over commonsense.".

I don't think that the Greens think their proposals through.

Is Mise,

You've got to stop getting your information only from anti-Green websites if you want to be taken seriously. Do some research as to what sort of wood burning the Greens object to, and why, rather than simply accepting any negative statement that feeds your existing hostility towards the Greens.